Date: 	Fri, 29 Aug 1997 10:29:04 -0400
From: "kenneth.mackendrick" <kenneth.mackendrick-AT-utoronto.ca>
Subject: Re: HAB: The Other



> Who is willing to address seduction in Habermasian terms?  
Certainly, neglecting the topic could lead to a "corrupt text," but 
maybe that insight was lost in the early Habermas as well ;->

I would suspect that seduction is a sure instance of strategic 
rationality - but foreplay, anticipation, excitement is neither strategic 
or communicative.  Erotic encounters can be experiences which meet 
needs, strategically, and make way for more communicative 
relationships - as wel as being communicative in themselves (i 
suppose that any sexual encounter which is not communicative is 
probbably not sex at all but a form of abuse).

  But i suspect that sex (understood as any erotic kind of relationship) 
cannot be reduced to rationalistic criteria (thankfully?).

did i just take this topic too seriously?
maybe i'll pick it up on a chat line ;)
ken "today is my last day of full time summer employment so maybe 
i'll get a life" mackendrick

speaking of chat lines - does anyone know of a philosophical chat 
line?  i think it might be interesting to discuss some of this issues in 
an even less formal setting.




     --- from list habermas-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---